This thread is an initial 'sandbox' for any kind of comments about previous categories that worked or did NOT work, and ANY sorts of new ideas for what we want to challenge our intrepid band of AMV editors with THIS year!

Yay! I enjoy this part My personal thoughts are as follows:I think Intensity is a really great solution to the Action category, I think it should definitely stick around.Retro I think this might be a sort of controversial request but I think it would be fun to bump the cut-off date to the beginning of 2000 because if you think about it anyone my age (late teens, early 20s) thinks of the anime from that time period as "classic anime" but a lot of it hasn't gotten quite as much modern AMV attention because a lot of us focus heavily on shiny new shows. On the other hand, for such an unusual category we have had it in the running for a while now and if there are enough cool new ideas I guess my vote goes to cutting it from the lineup; I'd hate for a whole category to stagnate.I heard talk of doing a "that's not what that series is about" category and I really love that idea; if it were to happen I'd really enjoy making an entry for it.Jidaigeki+... was in no way a bad idea. I just feel like it played out very differently than the rules implied it was and if it is to stick around I'd like it if it were renamed to something that showed it wasn't Japanese-historical specific.And one last thing I've been thinking about for a while... Random Amusement seems to be the most popular category with the audience but it seems to consist of two fairly different types of videos. Perhaps there's room to move some of it into a "Parody" category that was less about being especially comedic and more about parodying the source material? Maybe it's a bad idea but it seems like something that could attract more and a broader range of comedy entries which I think the audience would appreciate?

I semi agree with Raven that perhaps the time line for retro could be pushed back a bit, i think going to 2000 is pushing it a bit. I think it would be a good part of this discussion on what animes in particular we can call "Retro" There are a few I personally feel that could/should be considered retro that are just past the pre-1995 rule. The other thing i've been contemplating about the 1995 rule is what happens if the anime started pre-1995 but ended even a few years later? Does that mean you can uses season one but not season three?

I have to say, that im kida 50/50 on Jidaigeki. I really like the videos that came out of it but the problem I have is that if you don't have footage that doesn't fit in the category, you're pretty S.O.L. in trying to get in that category.

I had no idea what Jidaigeki+ or Genki were, as many probably didn't know. So the voting on that was more to taste then to anything to do with the category. Please use names of categories that people will understand, it does effect the votes.

I think the Random Amusement category was the best. This category should stay in my opinion to do just what it did. To give a complete freedom of creativity to amuse the crowd, giving results quite like randomly searching amv's produce.

The trailers category seem have quite an interest from the crowd. It also has a huge potential for variety. Two of my top 3 came from this section. I would like to see this come back again, along with intensity.

I enjoyed most of the amv's but.. All the other categories could ether use some love from the amv makers or could be considered for exchanging out. I'm not a HUGE amv person (though I thoroughly enjoy them,) but I had higher hopes for the Effects category. While I think it is good enough to stay, and liked it this year and think it should stay, I was expecting something else from it. Maybe I don't watch enough amv's to realize how well done the ones shown really were?

My thoughts on creating a new category stray away from the violence and more into the opposite direction. I would like to see a category specifically for romance or ecchi behavior in anime. I remember 2? amv's that had a really nice romantic/cuteness to them. I prefer something along the lines of "how to noesbleed" or "Bishōnen romantics"

My sis had a suggestion (and of course left it to me to post it), she wanted to suggest a "storyline" category. Basically some type of category for AMVs that tell you a story that goes perfectly with it's song, and that actually happens in its anime. Though I pointed out that it's kind of like the intensity category, she would like me to recommend it.

I think that would be a hard category to do due to the fact that in someone doesn't know the source footage of the AMV they won't know exactly how well it lines up with the storyline. The only sure fire way of getting into this category would be to go insanely mainstream (Naruto, DBZ, Deathnote, Bleach) so you make sure that a good 95% of people who see the AMV know enough about the anime to know how well you tell the storyline.

- Keeping 'Random Amusement' as a combination of 'Funny' and 'just plain weird - so it's funny' type of entertainment.

- It can be difficult to define a drama-type category that has serious works that entertain by means of an emotionally forceful message. This is how a real tear-jerker works - and those can certainly count as solid entertainment, but we have to do it in a way that brings in entries with a strong story line (also mentioned here) but does NOT bring in a bunch of schlocky sappy whiney angsty break-up/make-up songs. So I am looking for whatever keeps the audience either on the edge of their seats in silent suspense or any other sort of strong emotional engagement. We called this 'Intensity' last time.

- I am thinking of letting a 'Japanese something' go this time and trying a straight-forward definition of 'Instrumental.' Easy to understand; the constraint is that the music has no spoken works to it. For this time around I would like to exclude skat singing (nonsense syllables) because it then becomes my job and the judges' job to verify that the stuff really is NOT actually meaningful lyrics in foreign language we all do not know. But someone in the audience WILL, and I will get an e-mail from that one guy or girl who KNOWS Tuvan or Old High Slavonic... Now, for 'Instrumental,' I *am* considering allowing non-syllabic singing of the sort you can hear HERE. By the way, just in time for Hallowe'en, ain't this the CREEPIEST soprano line you've heard in a while? ( Chorus is SSA; it's R. Vaugn Williams Symph #7 about Captain Scott's failed expedition to find the South Pole and everybody froze to death. Also one of the few compositions I know that uses a wind machine in the score.) But this human voice is clearly used as an instrument rather than lyrics or even implied language. Instrumental would also be a haven for people who cannot make anything EXCEPT light-romance drama AMVs.

- Other ideas to keep kicking around are: some of last years judges suggested 'THAT'S NOT What THIS Anime is About!" - which happens to be the exact opposite of Sui Fong's suggestion. One previous winner totally pretzeled Kodomo no Jikan into a very poignant story which did NOT happen (while avoiding everything else in the show that people could get arrested for discussing if the other person in the chat-room happens to be an FBI agent...) So this might be a 'spoil the WRONG ending' (boy meets girl, girl chooses tertiary male character, heck: meanwhile boy goes off with crossover character from the anime next door...) Or a who-done-it except you re-arrange the footage to implicate some other character...? Much humor is based on opposites: Pikadiator matches Russel Crowe's gravelly Gladiator voice, you can also get funny having a giant formidable character (Street Fighter) bouncing around singing pipsqueak chirpy silliness.

- Retro still brings in some creative entries, so we can take alook at fresh definitions of what's in and what's out...

- Lastly for now, what I was looking for in 'Genki!' we might try calling it 'SPAZZ' to try to convey that we're looking for fast but cheery fun. (Not just speed metal to mech battles...)

- I am thinking of letting a 'Japanese something' go this time and trying a straight-forward definition of 'Instrumental.' Easy to understand; the constraint is that the music has no spoken works to it.

I don't usually listen to music without lyrics but I just recently happened to download a soundtrack I'm really into and I was actually already flirting with making something instrumental. If this becomes a category I would probably go through with it

- Other ideas to keep kicking around are: some of last years judges suggested 'THAT'S NOT What THIS Anime is About!" - which happens to be the exact opposite of Sui Fong's suggestion.

...ykno, I actually really like both ideas and I think it could potentially be really fun to run both categories at one con. The interesting thing about both of them is that those sorts of videos can be enjoyed at face-value for people who aren't familiar with the source or as a comparative piece for fans. I think both ideas have a lot of potential for new and interesting entries

- Lastly for now, what I was looking for in 'Genki!' we might try calling it 'SPAZZ' to try to convey that we're looking for fast but cheery fun. (Not just speed metal to mech battles...)

Idk if you dropped all the "Speed metal to mech battles" from Genki category this year but I didn't see a single one in there, buy I do have to say that this category is plagued by a type of video and that's the " (Haruhi + Lucky Star) X 10 + DDR Arrows" videos. (Yes I totally just make that a mathematical equation.) And to me all those videos could easily be dropped into "Effects" because its 10million overllays with 40million masked arrows randomly floating across the screen. I do think that this category need a name change but think calling it "Spazz" will just keep us in the basic same place.

- TRAILERS- RANDOM AMUSEMENT (includes both comedy and 'strange' works)- INSTRUMENTAL (no lyrics or scat; non-syllabic human voice is allowed)Example 1Example 2 (Yeah these are both orchestral style, but instrumental music does NOT have to be classical or orchetral in style or arrangement.)

For further discussion:

- RETRO ( How to define video and audio sources? )- EFFECTS ( Definitions, please?)- INTENSITY (How different from 'Action' or 'Drama' ? How do we get strong, moving stories but leave out the angsty emo crap?)

I think RETRO should be defined as having a song being made from the 80's or earlier, and the aninme has to have some, too. If it's multiple animes, then they all need to have been in the 80's or earlier. If it's a single anime, then at least part of it had to have been from this era.

Logged

I have a new blog! It is an anime-themed discussion site. Please check it out, and share your two cents!

I think RETRO should be defined as having a song being made from the 80's or earlier, and the anime has to have some, too. If it's multiple animes, then they all need to have been in the 80's or earlier.

Your vote & opinion noted! Anyone else want to chime in?

One thing to keep in mind is that the further into the past we set the cutoff date, the greater the gap between "today's" available resolutions (720p, 1080p coming on strong with Blu-Ray) and the age we select. For the 1980's that's mostly TV at 320x252p, unless someone has laser disks - these are getting as hard to find as a mechanical typewriter or a wall-mount telephone with real metal BELLS.

One idea I had heard mentioned was to keep the cutoff for both audio and video not as far in the past, BUT the trick is that the audio and the video have to be within an 'n' year span of each other. That may not be a good idea, because two of last year's stronger entries had audio from the 1950s and the 1930's. The AMV editors used the color desaturation rule to comply. Both works were very creative and entertaining.

Quote from: Washougal_Otaku

If it's a single anime, then at least part of it had to have been from this era.

So, if someone uses 'Gundam' or DBZ, then at least some portion of footage they select must have been created or broadcast from 1970's to before 1990? Interesting.

^ Yep! However, I think I should clarify what I was referring to. I know that there have been many Gundam series, and I'm sure that at least one of them began in the 1990's, (there may even be one that started in the 2000's). Those series wouldn't count; it would only apply to any Gundam series that would've began prior to 1990. If one started in 1986, but ended in 1992, then it would count.

« Last Edit: November 08, 2010, 02:21:48 pm by Washougal_Otaku »

Logged

I have a new blog! It is an anime-themed discussion site. Please check it out, and share your two cents!

I like the idea of relying on the anime's starting date rather than the time it ran as a whole or the ending date when it comes to Retro. I would hate to make an AMV and find out I can only use half of my footage.

But what about series with multiple continuities in it? Like FullMetal Alchemist for instance. Now I know that's a 2003 anime that wouldn't be used in a Retro AMV but the CONCEPT applies; a series that went on for a while, finished, then much later was picked up again and pretty much redone, ala Brotherhood.

And bringing that up... what about series with OVAs? Or videogames? Would they be unable to fit into a Retro category? O-O Will we get old school Alone in the Dark and FFIII AMVS? O:... I actually wanna see someone try that. xD

Well, in my mind, Full Metal Alchemist and Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood are two seperate series, similar to Tenchi Muyo, Tenchi Universe, and Tenchi in Tokyo. As for stuff with OVA's, I would think that the OVA's would count, unless they're a new type of storyline as the previous examples.

Logged

I have a new blog! It is an anime-themed discussion site. Please check it out, and share your two cents!

Well, in my mind, Full Metal Alchemist and Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood are two seperate series, similar to Tenchi Muyo, Tenchi Universe, and Tenchi in Tokyo. As for stuff with OVA's, I would think that the OVA's would count, unless they're a new type of storyline as the previous examples.

This may get difficult on the judges to try to make a cut-off point, or what is a significant enough stylistic break to no longer 'count.' And our poor editors who work so hard will be stuck trying to predict how the judges will call, say EVA: You Can (Not) Advance.

Then that makes me have to seek out and interview fans to see if they know quite enough about the history and continuity of many older shows, so they can say something more specific than "OK, *all* DBZ gets treated as if it started in 1979." Example: Unless you know a lot about Gundam, it's difficult to tell Char's Counter attack from Ember's Counterattack and Miller's report from Thresher's Report, etc. If you weren't 'into it back in the day,' it all looks like mecha with V-things on the forehead. Swap the V for little wings and you get RaXephon. And why were all these fangirls so pissed off about Relena, like 8~10 years ago? Now do all my judges have to be 38+ years old, so they can remember and debate this stuff?

We should make set of rules which are as simple and specific as possible to tell what's IN vs what's OUT.Also, since about 1/2 of then entries will come from outside the English-speaking world, let's see what we can do for people reading the rules page for whom English is a secondary language; they should be able to figure out what is being asked of them.

I'm not shooting down your suggestion, I'm only adding that whatever parameter(s) we decide on should be phrased simply yet specifically, so we can all easily know what is wanted.

Back up a few posts and you will see Examples 1 & 2 added for Instrumental above.The 'gimmie' is Example 1 - taken from 'Epilogue,' the 5th movement of R. Vaughn-Williams ''Sinfonia Antarctica," (No. 7.)

TRIVIA CHALLENGE: Can anyone name the musical cut from EXAMPLE 2? (Hint: Listen for a classic-rock 70s-style electronic keyboard mixed in there with the London Symphony Orch. & the English Chamber Choir)

I don't think it will be too hard for the judges to figure out what's retro or where to have a significant break on things once we make an actual ruling on a cut off date. Yes a lot of the old school Gundam looks the same but part of the entry process is sending in information about your video that includes source footage so distinguishing series from series shouldn't be a problem. On top of that even if someone where to try to slip in non-retro footage, there would be a large chance that someone would catch it and flag it for possible DQ so i don't know if anybody would even risk it.

I think RETRO should be defined as having a song being made from the 80's or earlier, and the aninme has to have some, too. If it's multiple animes, then they all need to have been in the 80's or earlier. If it's a single anime, then at least part of it had to have been from this era.

1980's is WAY to early of a cut of date for a retro category, you don't even get to touch Sailor Moon with that stipulation. I think that the Pre1995A.D. rule for that past two years is a good target area and is easy enough to figure out for even non-English speaking editors. Like i said in an earlier post I think a good way of going about finding a cutoff date asking, "What animes do we consider retro?"

Obviously there are a few nobrainers...Sailor MoonAstro BoyBubble Gum CrisisAkiraDragon Ball

There is no 'current cutoff' yet - at this writing there are 'other cutoffs of other years' - but right now YOU GUYS ARE IT - forging the NEW!

Now I once asked a radio professional what 'oldies' were, as a lead up to 'OK, so when do we get to call Jewel or Alanis Morrisette an OLDIE?" (I can hardly wait.) His answer was that in the radio industry 'oldies' were a fixed time and style, and that Pat Benetar and Cyndi Lauper get to become 'classic rock' (?) but not 'Oldies.' I'm like: 'C'MON Mick Jagger is an OLDIE by now isn't he?!?'

So: do we get sentimental about some Golden Age of Anime, a canon of certain classics which remain fixed in time, or does retro represent 'x' years ago, where 'x' can be adjusted to maintain interest in the category, but sooner or later will catch up to include Evangelion, Love Hina, Noir, Full Metal Panic, etc?

I think RETRO should be defined as having a song being made from the 80's or earlier, and the anime has to have some, too. If it's multiple animes, then they all need to have been in the 80's or earlier.

I think each year when we discuss this category there is a general confusion about whether this is a "Retro" or a "Vintage" category. I'll concede in regards to music that Retro might be considered 80's or earlier (although I'd like to point out classic rock radio stations have begun to play 90's music). But when we are looking at anime, which only really traces back to the 1960's (yes, there was stuff long before that but it isn't anything the average anime viewer would recognize as anime) 1990 or earlier really seems to wander into Vintage territory. If you define Retro as "things we saw as kids and are cool again because of nostalgia" and consider that the majority of anime-con attendees are in their teens and twenties, I would argue the for the audience Retro would be anything between 2000 (considering median of the audience's age is probably about 20 at the highest that assumes people started watching anime around 10 whereas most people I know started later than that) and like... 1985(?); With anything older than that actually being considered Vintage.

I'd be fine with defining this category as Vintage (though it'd be cool if we named it that), but to me they seem to be two fairly different things with very different appeals-- a Retro category would constrain editors to an era of anime that most of the audience is familiar with but haven't seen many AMVs for (Dragon Ball Z, Sailor Moon, Pokemon) because editors tend toward the newer, shinier stuff. A Vintage category would be appreciated by the minority of the audience who has been into anime long or broadly enough to recognize series that used to be popular prior to anime having much mainstream presence in America (early Gundam, the various Tatsunoko series, Astro Boy, Transformers if you want to consider it anime) and would otherwise have to stand on its own feet and not rely on fan-support to make it interesting.

Haha, anyway, sorry for typing so much I got a little carried away, I fear.

I consider Retro to be in the 70's & 80's with culture in general, because so much of these decades are considered to be of the past. So much of the 90's is still a good deal of "modern" culture that it doesn't feel very old-school.

Logged

I have a new blog! It is an anime-themed discussion site. Please check it out, and share your two cents!

So: do we get sentimental about some Golden Age of Anime, a canon of certain classics which remain fixed in time, or does retro represent 'x' years ago, where 'x' can be adjusted to maintain interest in the category, but sooner or later will catch up to include Evangelion, Love Hina, Noir, Full Metal Panic, etc?

I totally think that will be the case. Maybe instead of calling the category "Retro" we can give it a new name that keeps the spirit of the original category. Maybe like "Blast from the Past" or "Old School" where we could say all animes and music must be at least 15 years old or something like that. Then we don't have to debate weather or not we should consider a title to be "retro" but weather or not is the title old enough.

We did indeed run a category called "Old School" a few years ago and it had very similar constraints to the previous two rounds of "Retro" categories. I remember there was one option in that category that NOBODY took a shot at:

"Audio is MIDI music from [period] gaming consoles."

For the category intro, I composited Speed Racer into B/W and had him driving one of the 30s-looking vehicles from 'The Animatrix.'I applied the Mark V graphic to the spare tire cover (on the rear of the vehicle) as it drives under the elevated rail girders.The accompanying music was a slow piano rag by either Scott Joplin or Eubie Blake. (I forgot which, offhand...)

I totally think that will be the case. Maybe instead of calling the category "Retro" we can give it a new name that keeps the spirit of the original category.

I think this has really always been a "Vintage" category and perhaps we would have success calling it that.

However, I think the "Old School" vs. "Retro" title underscores an important distinction in what the creators are looking to make. I think that that the vast majority of entries to the Retro category have fallen into one of three subcategories: (1) I made this AMV a long time ago, hey look it fits these rules I might as well submit it; (2) I want to take a new anime and re-adapt it to a "vintage-y feel"; or (3) I want to make an AMV with an older anime I have fond memories of. If we take the winners to be "what the audience seems to enjoy" both of our previous winners have been #2.

With that in mind, I think the regulations that are going to lead to a category that is best received by the audience and the creators are those that are not overly restrictive, especially in regards to popular anime. I think it would be better to give dates/numbers/etc a little on the broader end of things and then let the judges decide what they think feels sufficiently Retro enough to be included in the show. I would guess an AMV using a well-known but out-dated 90's song and a popular anime with poor production values, even from as late as the early 2000's, is going to feel significantly older than a new-sounding 80's song to Akira or Princess Mononoke. (Parts of Akira look newer than the majority of what is on TV right now )

I think this has really always been a "Vintage" category and perhaps we would have success calling it that.

However, I think the "Old School" vs. "Retro" title underscores an important distinction in what the creators are looking to make.

I personally like having a few categories with higher restrictions on them because it challenges and editor do do something different and I'd personally like to see more videos to older titles then having every category have Deathnote, Gurren Laggan, Haruhi, Luckystar, and/or Advent Children.

I think this has really always been a "Vintage" category and perhaps we would have success calling it that.

However, I think the "Old School" vs. "Retro" title underscores an important distinction in what the creators are looking to make.

I personally like having a few categories with higher restrictions on them because it challenges and editor do do something different and I'd personally like to see more videos to older titles then having every category have Deathnote, Gurren Laggan, Haruhi, Luckystar, and/or Advent Children.

Amen. There needs to be more of a variety, I think, and having restrictions like this might help with that.

Logged

I have a new blog! It is an anime-themed discussion site. Please check it out, and share your two cents!

I personally like having a few categories with higher restrictions on them because it challenges and editor do do something different and I'd personally like to see more videos to older titles then having every category have Deathnote, Gurren Laggan, Haruhi, Luckystar, and/or Advent Children.

Quote from: Washougal_Otaku

Amen. There needs to be more of a variety, I think, and having restrictions like this might help with that.

One of the ways we did this about 5 years ago was with categories named "New [this]" or "New [that]" - one example was "New Dance" - where in this was a dance-music AMV category, but "New" meant that the anime used could be no more than "n" years old. Ufortunateely, Gurren came out in 2007, so it would be hard set the cutoff at 3 years old. Death Note is one year older than Gurren.

I'd personally like to see more videos to older titles then having every category have Deathnote, Gurren Laggan, Haruhi, Luckystar, and/or Advent Children.

Well, none of those titles are even remotely in the time-frame that was being discussed. But checking out the list Prinz Eugen just posted many of those titles *are*. I know that previously we used Evangelion as the cut-off anime, perhaps a compromise could be met by picking a new one? Personally, I feel like the original Eva is within Retro limits at this point (especially in light of Rebuild), as is Sailor Moon, Utena, Trigun gets a little iffy and Cowboy Bebop is probably not. Perhaps we could bump the date up just 3 years to '98 and say "everything prior to Cowboy Bebop"?

Well, none of those titles are even remotely in the time-frame that was being discussed. But checking out the list Prinz Eugen just posted many of those titles *are*. ?

The problem is that the query is set up for ALL AMVs in the database ever - like from 1998 or so - and back in the initial AMV heyday TONS of fanboys made DBZ and Kenshin AMVs, and all the fangirls made Sailor Moon and InuYasha AMVs - all in huge enough numbers that these haven't gone away, in part because there was almost nothing else in anime to watch. (Ask some of us dinosaurs about the days then there were only 4 or 5 TV channels to watch on VHF TV plus maybe about 8 on UHF. What I hated most was when a President came on - there was NO ESCAPE. Click, click, click, and he was STILL THERE no matter where you went! Only the color spectra were different...)

So if there was a List of Animes used for AMVs from the past 5 years only, then that might skew the sample and help pick off the Harihis, Lucky Crack, Death Notes, and Final Motorcycle Dudes, and Lenten Children. ( I still think someone needs to do a Lent vs Advent pun AMV on this.)

Also, it would be cool if a user could DISclude all wmv's from the search parameters - that would knock out all the WMM/YouTube cruft.

Quote from: murder_of_raven

Trigun gets a little iffy

I read this as "Trigun gets a little fly" and remembered THIS AMV, #259 on the org...and, see you around, Stampede...

Here's the problem that I can see for the future, every year were going to have to have this same discussion over and over if we just set a random date. Even if we do set the cutoff back 3 years, will that be enough for everyone next year or will we be debating weather or not something that came out in 1999 should be dropped into the category (I couldn't think of a specific title)?

I really like the idea of having the rule become "must be at least however old" and every year no matter what things will be cycled in slowly to include things like Bebop, Trigun, Love Hina, and then eventually we'll even get to cycling in Death Sticky Note, and Ouran High School Let's Watch Vic Mig-(whatever his last name is) Freak out for 24 Episodes, and by then we'll be complaining about there being to many videos of whatever the heck the new batch of editors love far too much. (And whatever that happens to be, i got 20 bucks saying that Vic will be in it.)

To me that's the most logical answer, it's easy to understand (even for our non english speaking editors), there's no Grey area, and no matter what it just updates itself until we get tired of the category and swap it out with something new.

I really like the idea of having the rule become "must be at least however old"

Yeah, this really seems like the best way of doing things. Last year we did Eva's "1995 or younger" so I guess previously we were doing 14 years... some poking around anidb.net gives us the following list:

Of course, this brings up an interesting question. We get a totally different list if we go by "start date" rather than "end date"-- End date keeps us totally within our set year which I think gives a slight advantage to shorter series because long-running shows rarely upgrade their production values mid-series. Start date allows for long series to be entered a little more easily and removes the problem someone brought up last year, that they didn't like that if they used a series that started before the cut-off date and ended after they wouldn't be allowed to use all their footage. On the other hand, if you pick something that started the year of the cut-off date it could potentially run way way past it and we run into the question of "when does it not still count? can I use something that aired last week if the show started thirty years ago?"

Wrt the "start date or end date?" question: I don't know how feasible it is in practice, but why not use the episode air date (or movie release date) instead so that you're dating the actual material? It might be more difficult because not every anime develops drastic style differences like Naruto, but I think people could be trusted to behave honorably. Especially if they know their work will be under the scrutiny of fans who notice the most minute details.

Pulling out the completely hypothetical example of >10 years to illustrate, you could use any Macross material except Macross Zero or Macross Frontier. Or in the case of One Piece, you could use the earliest episodes (anything through the Little Garden arc, eps 1-78), but nothing from the Drum Island arc and on. Assuming you're talking original air date, that is.

One question that might be more problematic: Do you use the original air date / release date, or when it became available in the US? That can be tricky with older titles that didn't benefit from the speed of modern fansubbing, one perfect example being Maison Ikkoku. Original airdates: 1986-1988. Eps 1-36 (dub) in US: 1996-1999. Eps 36-64 (sub) in US: 1999-2001. Eps 36-96 (dub) in US: 2002-2006. The final episodes, which were created 22 years ago (pretty darn retro), didn't get here commercially until 4 years ago.

« Last Edit: November 12, 2010, 12:31:48 pm by randompvg »

Logged

This is my serious voice. Otherwise, I'm just another anime fan, not a moderator.

Do you use the original air date / release date, or when it became available in the US?

This is another one that's a lot easier in practice than it sounds. We get a lot of international submissions so US air date has no more relevancy in say, France, than Spanish air date. The only thing that really makes sense with this one is to go by Japanese air-date, which is conveniently what anidb does.

One question that might be more problematic: Do you use the original air date / release date, or when it became available in the US?

For sure it'd would have to be Japanese air date. I doubt that 100% of anime make it to other countries for one reason or another and not including them would just be faulty. And I would bet money one some editor out there who is absolutely in love with one of those titles, has Japanese DVDs of it, and would be pissed if we didn't let them use it.

you could use any Macross material except Macross Zero or Macross Frontier

Oh, well that makes it quite easy. When a series has multiple titles it would seem logical to treat them as sequel series and analyze them separately.

You're right, and for that reason I shouldn't have made this one of the two examples. It was erroneously intuitive to include a case with an unambiguous start/break time for clarity.

But it still doesn't resolve the example of a series like One Piece. There don't seem to be many series that ran more than one year in any given year, but I'm sure people will still argue passionately 1) in favor of their favorite series which they want to include and 2) against someone else including a series they don't want. That's why I suggested taking "episode air date" as a marker rather than "series air date" - it's a compromise between the two groups, and shouldn't need to be invoked often.

Do you use the original air date / release date, or when it became available in the US?

This is another one that's a lot easier in practice than it sounds. We get a lot of international submissions so US air date has no more relevancy in say, France, than Spanish air date. The only thing that really makes sense with this one is to go by Japanese air-date, which is conveniently what anidb does.

Both this and somanyturtles' explanation make perfect sense. (^_^) Maison Ikkoku just particularly came to mind as an example of how the question could be sticky in theory.

Logged

This is my serious voice. Otherwise, I'm just another anime fan, not a moderator.

But it still doesn't resolve the example of a series like One Piece. There don't seem to be many series that ran more than one year in any given year, but I'm sure people will still argue passionately 1) in favor of their favorite series which they want to include and 2) against someone else including a series they don't want. That's why I suggested taking "episode air date" as a marker rather than "series air date" - it's a compromise between the two groups, and shouldn't need to be invoked often.

For that I'd think we'd break down the anime into story arcs. Trying to pin down individual episodes would be way to hard.

But it still doesn't resolve the example of a series like One Piece. There don't seem to be many series that ran more than one year in any given year, but I'm sure people will still argue passionately 1) in favor of their favorite series which they want to include and 2) against someone else including a series they don't want. That's why I suggested taking "episode air date" as a marker rather than "series air date" - it's a compromise between the two groups, and shouldn't need to be invoked often.

For that I'd think we'd break down the anime into story arcs. Trying to pin down individual episodes would be way to hard.

Especially for series that have a lot of them.

Logged

I have a new blog! It is an anime-themed discussion site. Please check it out, and share your two cents!

For that I'd think we'd break down the anime into story arcs. Trying to pin down individual episodes would be way to hard.

Ugh, what? Trying to come up with the air-date of a specific story arc sounds even harder than tracking down the date a specific episode was released. It isn't like there's a website that tracks the date specific arcs came out or something, I'm sure that sounds more doable if you have shows that have been obsessed over like Dragon Ball Z or Sailor Moon in mind, but how much trouble are you going to have trying to define a story-arc let alone find dates for it for an older series? Urusei Yatsura ran for 5 years plus 6 movies, I imagine finding the specific air date for "episode 37" (random example) is going to be nearly impossible... finding a verifiable "arc release date" is going to be completely impossible. Furthermore, it's not like the judges are ever going to have access to people's source material-- if there are dozens of scenes from episodes over the cut-off date and none of the judges are familiar with the show, how are they expected to know?

I really think we need to base this on the start and/or end date of series, anything else overly complicates the situation for both the editors and the judges.

Now what would the field of available video look like if you said ALL serialized works of the franchise (this excludes OVAs or one-shot specials) must have ENDED before date "x."

Granted this would knock out some stuff that started a few decades ago and are still running today as weekly broadcasts, (Detective Conan, One Piece, etc) and maybe about 4 or 5 other shows. But: is there enough other material out there to play with, especially if we us a "n years ago" defininition which can move forward in time automatically for next year?

One effect of the "all done by no later than 13 years ago" type of rule is that we will really be looking at material that is undeniably "in the rearview mirror" - it is gone, and firmly ensconced in the past. By next year's contest, Naru Narusegawa would be PUSHING THIRTY and Ikari Gendo would be a retired grump.Motoko Kusanagi functions as quaintly as Office '98.

For that I'd think we'd break down the anime into story arcs. Trying to pin down individual episodes would be way to hard.

Ugh, what? Trying to come up with the air-date of a specific story arc sounds even harder than tracking down the date a specific episode was released. It isn't like there's a website that tracks the date specific arcs came out or something...

Moot point, but there are actually a number of them. Ten years ago information like this would be ridiculously difficult to find, but that was before the dawn of the wikis.

Again, moot, but in my mind contestants would be a lot wiser to be afraid of the fans catching them than the judges. Three judges might not recognize a two-second Crest of the Stars battle scene as too young (the BotSIII OVAs were only a few years ago), but you can bet the farm on a thousand fans twigging onto the difference between Mahoro's maid outfit in Tadaima Okaeri versus virtually the same outfit in Automatic Maiden. Would someone be wise to decide the odds that a misplaced scene will win them one title are worth the odds of someone catching it and them being shunned by the community from then on?

Logged

This is my serious voice. Otherwise, I'm just another anime fan, not a moderator.

...contestants would be a lot wiser to be afraid of the fans catching them than the judges.... the odds of someone catching it and them being shunned by the community from then on?

Generally we don't let roving mobs of fans maraud the contestants, and the 'community' opinion of anyone who submits an AMV is never used as a criterion do disclude or not select an AMV. Generally I do not inform the judges' panel of the creator real name or screen name, so unless someone shows that information in a bumper in the AMV, it is not considered.

What we have done before is that if any show STARTED before the cutoff date then it was OK to use in all its later incarnations (wait - carne? Anime is not made of flesh, or even cellophane anymore - it'd all digital. Shall we say inbitnations?) and that would mean if CotS was OK then so was BotS.

The question remains that if we set down a rule, how easy is it to detect that someone is 'gaming the system' versus not knowing himself what the broadcast date of THIS arc verses THAT arc might be.

For that I'd think we'd break down the anime into story arcs. Trying to pin down individual episodes would be way to hard.

Ugh, what?

What I was trying to say is that if there becomes a question of when a specific part of an anime came out it would be easier to classify story arcs than individual eps. If you take the rules as is, that means you need to find the exact episode that said clip in question is from and find that date where as if Goku is fighting Cell, then you're in the Cell Saga arc, a lot easier to pin down.

The question remains that if we set down a rule, how easy is it to detect that someone is 'gaming the system' versus not knowing himself what the broadcast date of THIS arc verses THAT arc might be.

If you let someone use the "I don't know" excuse then whats stopping everyone else from using the same excuse but for different rules.

"I don't know how to remove the subtitles from my footage." "I didn't know that "Avatar: The Last Airbender isn't anime!" "I didn't know that a panty shot ten frames long is considered explicit!"

This is all easy stuff to figure out by either a easy google search or by asking a simple question on the forums. I don't even think it will be that huge of a problem considering that most DVD sets for the large series are broken up in the correct places, if you start to grab another box set, chances are good that it's a new season/arc or the second half of the one you're on. Shouldn't be to hard to figure out.